Regalado v. Callaghan

A judgment in favor of a contractor’s injured employee and against the homeowner who hired the contractor is affirmed under the “retained control exception” to the independent contractor rule, since the homeowner retained control by assuming responsibility for obtaining building permits and city inspections—one purpose of which is to assure that the work is safely carried out.  A judgment in favor of a contractor’s employee and against the homeowner who hired the contractor is affirmed under the retained control exception to the independent contractor rule.  CACI 1009B properly states the elements of that exception.  The trial court did not abuse its discretion in rejecting the homeowner’s additional special instruction on the point since it was partially incorrect and insofar as it was correct repeated the CACI instruction.  The homeowner retained control by assuming responsibility for obtaining building permits and city inspections, part of the purpose of which is to assure that the work is safely carried out.  The contractor’s post-injury payment of “wages” to the injured plaintiff was a gift and so was properly not deducted from plaintiff’s lost wages recovery from the homeowner.

California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division 1 (Huffman, Acting P.J.); September 16, 2016; 2016 WL 5243287

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s